Opinion
Civil Action No. 24877.
January 15, 1946.
Milton M. Burke, of Washington, D.C., for plaintiff.
Joseph W. Wyatt, of Washington, D.C., for third-party plaintiff.
Louis Ottenberg, of Washington, D.C., for third party defendant, Wm. H. Saunders Co., Inc.
Action by Kermit Steuer against Columbia Construction Company and others for personal injuries sustained by plaintiff in a fall on premises owned by named defendant. Defendant Columbia Construction Company brought in Wm. H. Saunders Co., Inc., as a third-party defendant. On motion by third-party defendant for summary judgment against Columbia Construction Company.
Motion granted.
Judgment affirmed 156 F.2d 563.
Motion by Wm. H. Saunders Co., Inc., third party defendant, for summary judgment against Columbia Construction Company, defendant and third party plaintiff. The action was brought to recover damages for personal injuries sustained by the plaintiff by a fall on premises owned by the defendant. It was claimed that the personal injuries were sustained as a result of the defendant's negligence in maintaining the premises in a dangerous condition. The defendant, Columbia Construction Company, brought in Wm. H. Saunders, Inc., as a third party defendant, asserting that the original defendant had executed an assignment of rent and power of attorney, by which it assigned to the third party defendant all of the rents and income from the property and appointed the third party defendant its agent to collect rents and manage the property. The third party complaint alleges that the third party defendant was charged with the duty of maintaining the property.
The third party defendant moved for summary judgment on the ground that the assignment of rent and power of attorney were not effective at the time of the accident referred to in the original complaint, but were in effect only during a period when the original defendant was in default in making payments due under a certain deed of trust.
The third party complaint seems to charge the third party defendant solely on the basis of the assignment of rents and power of attorney. It is established by papers submitted on this motion, however, that the power was not in effect at the time of the accident. Therefore, there was no obligation on the part of the third party defendant to make repairs or to maintain the property.
There is no material issue of fact on the question whether the assignment and the power to attorney were in effect at the time of the accident. They were in effect only during a default which had previously existed under the deed of trust. This default had been made good and, therefore, the assignment was no longer in effect when the plaintiff's injuries were sustained.
Motion for summary judgment in favor of the third party defendant granted.